Saturday, February 27, 2010

This article concerns an old argument, yet an old argument that requires solving, especially in the aftermath of the ClimateGate revelations and other ‘gates’ opened up in the post-ClimateGate period between last November and now.

The subject is from an email that has been circulating for some time to demonstrate how special interest groups in the name of the health of global environment has not only stuck their noses in a matter that seems to be beyond their ability to grasp, but alter or make up the facts that substantiates their venomous advocacy against America becoming self-sufficient when it comes to crude oil production. Rather than transcribing the email here, I will just direct you to a site that has already published it, including the photos in the circulated email.

It is at Heritage blog publishing dated June 29th 2008, as well as at Canada Free Press. Pretty pathetic that nothing was done about this since 2006, it is 2010 and still they listen to the environmentalists who should undergo psychoanalysis in order to possibly understand their reasoning.

So based upon the subject and the email of the Comparison of ANWR and environmentalist and government advocacy individuals and groups against drilling in Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, other sites where at least 34 billion barrels of oil just sits waiting to be tapped; as well as off shore drilling prospects that China has taken advantage of off the coast of Cuba – here is the analysis and assessment of the email …

Friday, February 26, 2010

Every new regulation concerning commerce or revenue; or in any manner affecting the value of the different species of property, presents a new harvest to those who watch the change and can trace its consequences; a harvest reared not by themselves but by the toils and cares of the great body of their fellow citizens. This is a state of things in which it may be said with some truth that laws are made for the few not for the many. Federalist No. 62

I have written in the past concerning the infiltration of progressive liberal-Marxism invading our educational system with the help of the central government usurping states’ rights. Instead of looking at the root of the problems of the nationalized educational system, the members of the US Congress and recent presidents have just funneled more tax dollars in the system. No Child Left Behind was a flop when it was conceived and can readily be seen that it hasn’t worked. Politicians need to stop experimenting on society. It just has wasted taxpayer dollars and undermined the education of our youth, their future and the future of America. Americans can no longer tolerate government elected officials thinking that problems are solved just by increasing funding via taxpayers of America.

Take a very close look at the summary of Senate bill S.2678 on the left and Senate Resolution 511 on the right (click to enlarge). Note the names of the sponsor and cosponsors, and note the dates! Even though S.2678 did not get past committee, it served its purpose in the media, especially when Sen. McCaskill pushed through Senate Resolution 511. They hoped to put the public's mind to rest about eligibility for the presidency." After that, these players felt ready to sail ahead into the election without kickback from the public. Or so they thought!

About a year ago a blogger called Zapem published this article to explain how and why Obama's nomination for President was engineered. The facts remain the facts, regardless of the time since Zapem's telling words were written, so every now and then we must remind ourselves of the people who ignored the Constitution for personal gain and power.

Please read this article, and remember the players, because we must never let this happen again.

If one were to look at the activity on Capitol Hill during the campaign, there would be no question in their minds that both McCain and Obama were sweating the “natural born citizen” issue.How do we arrive at that conclusion? We take McCain’s ingrained, glib advice and “Look at the record, my friends“.

If you have been unable up until now to wrap your brain around the election fraud that occurred in the 2008 Presidential (Electors) Election in applicable* states like Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia, among others; well, this picture showing how that fraud was carried out in Texas is worth a thousand words.

As you follow this roadmap to fraud, keep in mind: if Barack Obama failed to satisfy the eligibility requirements of office to get election officials to print his name on the ballot in the state of Texas then...

*Applicable states for the purpose of charging election fraud in the 2008 election are those states whose laws only allow the names of qualified candidates to appear on the ballot.

JAMESBURG, NJ – (Feb. 22, 2010) - On January 19, 2010, I filed the Appellants' Opening Brief in the appeal of Kerchner et al. v. Obama et al. which is currently pending in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. In that appeal, we maintain that the New Jersey Federal District Court erred in dismissing our case by ruling that plaintiffs do not have standing to challenge Obama's alleged eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military and that our case presents a non-justiciable political question. In our case, we have provided the Founder’s and Framers’ definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen” which is a child born in the country to citizen parents. We maintain that Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because he lacks unity of citizenship and allegiance from birth which is obtained when a child is born in the United States to a mother and father who are both United States citizens at the time of birth. Obama’s father was only a temporary visitor to the United States when Obama was born and never even became a resident let alone a citizen. Not being an Article II “natural born Citizen,” Obama is not eligible to be President and Commander in Chief.

We also maintain that Obama has failed to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii by publicly presenting a copy of a contemporaneous birth certificate, a long-form birth certificate providing the name of the hospital in which he was born and other corroborating data which was generated when he was born in 1961 and not simply a digital image of computer generated Certification of Live Birth [COLB] allegedly obtained from the Hawaii Department of Health in 2007 which some unknown person posted on the internet in 2008, or other contemporaneous and objective documentation. At the bottom of Obama’s Certification of Live Birth (COLB), it states: "This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding." Under the concept of prima facie evidence, the presumption that the fact exists fails when evidence contradicting that fact is presented and in such case the interested party needs to present other competent evidence to prove the existence of that alleged fact. If he fails to do so, the alleged fact is not proven, even if the opposing party produces no further evidence. There exists a considerable amount of evidence which puts serious doubt on Obama’s allegation that he was born in Hawaii. To date, Obama has presented no additional evidence other than the internet image of his Certification of Live Birth (COLB) and two unreliable newspaper announcements regarding where he was born. Hence, the prima facie validity of the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) must fail and Obama should be compelled to produce other objective, credible, and sufficient evidence of where he was born such as a contemporaneous birth certificate from 1961. Having failed to meet his constitutional burden of proof under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, we cannot accept Obama as a “natural born Citizen.”

Circuit Court of Appeals rules provide that an appellant’s opening brief is not to exceed 14,000 words. Because of the extraordinary nature and complexity of the question of whether putative President Barack Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and therefore eligible to be President, whether my clients (the plaintiffs) have standing to bring an action against Obama and Congress in which they maintain that Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” and that Congress failed to meet its constitutional duty to protect my clients by assuring them that Obama is a “natural born Citizen,” and whether plaintiffs’ action presents a nonjusticiable political question which the courts cannot address, I was compelled to file a brief which contained 20,477 words. So that the Court would accept the overlength brief, I filed a motion with the Court for leave to file the overlength brief.

By order dated February 22, 2010, the Honorable Circuit Judge Michael A. Chagares on behalf of the Motion's Panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals granted plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file the overlength brief. This is great news because the case will now continue forward as scheduled. Obama’s and Congress’s opposition brief was initially due on February 22, 2010. The Department of Justice obtained a 14-day extension to file that brief, making the new due date March 8, 2010. After they file their opposition brief, I will then have 14 days within which to file a reply to that brief. All briefs will be posted at this blog and it is my hope that the public will read these briefs so as to stay fully informed on this issue that is critically important not only to my clients but also to our Constitutional Republic.

Monday, February 22, 2010

If you hate MSNBC's hypocritical Keith Olberman, this is the video for you! DallasTeaParty.org has issued an invitation to Olberman to attend their next gathering in Dallas on February 27, 2010, Noon to 2:00.

Friday, February 19, 2010

Yes, fellow Americans, President Obama and associates are making Changes, but I doubt it was what those who voted for him ever thought to ask just exactly WHAT were those changes – and those he mentioned specifically, he has done nothing about. Like the happy folks behind the presidential candidate with the Obama fans shirts, photo left. (American Heritage) Social and political scientists are right - there are times in history that tyrants are cheered on as they prepare to take away liberties and rights from the people.

It is usually easier to pinpoint problems than it is to find and implement the solution.

Americans can see what the problem is, they feel the brunt of poor leadership; however they have voted elected or reelected candidates who: (1) Are part of the problem; (2) ideology is not conducive to a Jeffersonian republic, but instead to a Marxist static state; [I](3) Political party loyalty more important than affairs of the state and the people, as George Washington warned.

If true reform is going to occur, the Republican Party must buckle down and return to the original planks of their political platform and refuse to compromise with Democratic leadership that follows the planks of the Communist Manifesto.

The GOP must reform or submit to Independents or new third party movements to perform this significant and massive task laid before Americans. The party has given a bad impression of grassroot conservatives, and as the National Tea Party endeavors have shown – their numbers are returning to the point of majority.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

JR is a relatively new blog which is opening the door to contributing authors. To post here, authors need to be conservative thinkers with good writing skills, and a broad interest in current events. If you have special knowledge in a niche area such as government, energy, education, science, healthcare, taxation, small business, foreign policy, constitutional law, or any other area, so much the better. Regardless of your particular interests, we're looking for people who will make reasoned arguments backed up with good sources. Graphic artists and cartoonists are also invited to offer submissions.

Before contacting JR, please review the articles that have been published on this site to ensure that Jefferson’s Rebels is the right venue for your views, and that you are comfortable with the tone of this blog. Authors should be willing to moderate comments to their articles and images should that become necessary.

If you would like to be considered for publication, send an email using the contact form in the sidebar. Include links to commentaries that you have written, or artwork you have created, so that they can be reviewed. If we like what we see, we will contact you. IMPORTANT: Be sure to include your preferred contact information for moderation purposes. Authors will need to set up a profile on Disqus.

With local elections pending, now is an excellent time to use the E-The People Voter Guide, which is located in the sidebar of this website. Since the internet has become my primary news source, and because I don't subscribe to the local paper, this voter tool has proven to be extremely useful. Without it, I would have some difficulty getting to know the candidates, including judges. Never let it be said that grassroots tea party movement voters enter the polling booth uninformed. This tool makes voting very easy, and very smart!

Simply enter your address in the widget, and you will be directed to a page that lists candidates running for election in your district. Below the list of candidate names there is a series of questions asked of each candidate so that you will know where each stands on the issues relevant for that position. If there are only two candidates, their answers appear side-by-side. If several candidates are running for the same office, use the two pull down menus to choose two of the candidates. Their responses will appear side-by-side. If you like one candidate better than another, select a different candidate to compare with your first choice. Once you've made your decision, tick the box for your final candidate. Use the NEXT link at the top of the ballot to continue through the other races.

After you've selected all the candidates you plan to vote for, enter your email address, and the "ballot" will be sent to you. If you think you may have trouble remembering every candidate's name, you can take this unofficial ballot with you to the polling booth as a memory aid.

Monday, February 15, 2010

Click title to access the video. Dr. John Drew is a political scientist who knew Barack Obama while at Occidental College. Dr. Drew was at one time a self-proclaimed Marxist. He has since become a conservative. Dr. Drew states unequivocally that Barack Obama was, and still is, a Marxist.

Today is the anniversary of George Washington’s nationally celebrated day. At 10 a.m. a wreath-laying ceremony occurred at George Washington’s tomb celebrating his service as the first commanding general and first President of the United States.

Now it is called President’s Day because some politically correct moron and group of morons decided that all presidents should be honored on the same day as our First President. While the official day of George Washington’s birthday is February 22nd, it no longer is a nationally declared holiday – replaced by President’s Day celebrated on the third Monday of the month of February. President’s today couldn’t hold a match to George Washington’s reputation and character, a great man but nonetheless, a human being who stood tall above most of his peers – in height as well as stature. Loved so much by the American citizens in a new nation of unified states, he could have easily been President of the United States for life. But he didn't.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Whoa!! As you read this article, remember the facial features of Barack Obama and Stanley Dunham--long face, big ears, small eyes, high forehead, upper lip, and similar height of the two men. Hmmm!! If Cashill's scenario were ever proven to be fact, it would probably end the question about Obama's "natural born Citizen" status, but it would raise another question: who was Obama's birth mother?

Friday, February 12, 2010

On January 19, 2010, I [Att. Mario Apuzzo] filed the Appellants' Opening Brief in the appeal of Kerchner et al. v. Obama et al. which is currently pending in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. In that appeal, we maintain that the New Jersey Federal District Court erred in dismissing our case by ruling that plaintiffs do not have standing to challenge Obama's alleged eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military and that our case presents a non-justiciable political question. In our case, we have provided the Founder’s and Framers’ definition of an Article II “natural born Citizen” which is a child born in the country to citizen parents. We maintain that Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because he lacks unity of citizenship and allegiance from birth which is obtained when a child is born in the United States to a mother and father who are both United States citizens at the time of birth. Obama’s father was only a temporary visitor to the United States when Obama was born and never even became a resident let alone a citizen. Not being an Article II “natural born Citizen,” Obama is not eligible to be President and Commander in Chief.

Click the link above to read the full article and to follow Attorney Apuzzo's internal links.

This is a follow-up to my recent article about obot SMRSTRAUSS. Since the article was published, two people have supplied me with several newIP addresses used by this person. I would like to collect as many of these as possible to create a database. If this person has posted on your blog and you have access to his IP addresses, I would appreciate receiving that information, including the date (or date range) linked to those addresses. You can submit these to me either in the comment section of this notice or in the comment section of the original article. Alternatively, you can send them to me privately by using the contact form in the sidebar.

I welcome any information that might add substance to my investigation. If you have facts that might be useful, please feel free to share that information with me.

Since receiving the latest IP addresses, my instinct tells me there is more to SMRSTRAUSS than meets the eye.

Friday, February 12, 2010

Our country is in the midst of a civil war. President Barack Obama and his minions of intellectual elites have declared war on the citizens of our republic. As loyal cadets of the silent majority we must stand up to their assault on our freedoms and traditional American values. If we want our children to grow up in the same America we know and love, now is the time to speak our minds and say enough is enough.

We adults must begin to break our silence as the left's platform of political correctness intentionally seeks to undermine the role of the parent and destroy individualism. We must make time to read every school notice, regularly attend PTA meetings, and have parent teacher conferences. We must not be afraid to pick up the phone or write letters of complaint to networks when we see children's media complicit in the attack on parental rights. As members of the silent majority we have always embraced politeness and caution in voicing our sociological views. Our "preaching to the choir mentality" is a luxury we can no longer afford. In today’s political climate, we must confront those who seek to destroy our culture.

The cult of political correctness has been slowly dictating to us for quite a while and we didn't even notice it. We laughed it off when teachers were bullied into not grading papers with a red pen because red is too aggressive, stressful and demoralizing. We listened civilly to the politically correct puppets obvious anti-competitiveness argument that the American institutions of dodge ball and tag were too hostile and victimizing to children. We raised eyebrows in California when children were banned from the four-decade long tradition of wearing pilgrim and Indian costumes for the school Thanksgiving pageant under the guise of sensitivity. How much longer are we going to accommodate these strikes against our children and our American heritage?

In order to understand the left's fascination with political correctness we must first understand its goal and where this dangerous concept came from. It was developed by the Frankfurt School in New York. Originally the Frankfurt School was a think tank called “The Institute for Social Research” in Frankfurt Germany. Their initial job was finding what would be Russia’s biggest obstacle in spreading communism across the world. They found it to be the conviction of pro-individualism in Europe and North America's modern culture. This went against communism's core argument that acceptable thought comes only from the collective, not the individual.

After moving to New York, these group thinkers used a combination of psychological conditioning with business monikers and popular phrases. The purpose of this combination? By changing people's language, they could control people's belief system. This immoral brainchild is not change we can believe in nor is it American in any way. As adults we must continue to stand up and speak out against political correctness, or one day in the not so near future our children and their children will no longer answer to themselves. Rather, they will answer to Washington, and to answer to Washington in recent times is to answer to the Beast.

Despite Climategate, despite a petition signed by 17,200 scientists (real, not junk scientists including 3,000 climate-weather experts) around the world, despite investigative websites like Junk Science[Steven Milloy]; the Obama Nation government has not only continued with the climate change scenario (formerly Al Gore’s global warming alarm movement) but his administration has created a new agency, as though our government wasn’t big enough. The initial budget is $62 million and is part of NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration entitled NCS: National Climate Service.

The role of this service is provided at the new agency’s website:

The Regional Climate Centers (RCC) deliver climate services at national, regional and state levels working with NOAA partners in the NationalClimaticDataCenter, National Weather Service, the American Association of State Climatologists, and NOAA Research Institutes. This successful effort resulted in jointly developed products, services, and capabilities that enhance the deliver of climate information to the American public, and builds a solid foundation for a National Climate Service. As NOAA and Congress work to help society adapt to climate change, these collaborative efforts form a framework for the service, data stewardship, and applied research components of the National Climate Service.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

An individual using the tag smrstrauss has been an extraordinarily busy fellow and an annoying enigma on the internet since late 2008, but now his identity is known. Mr. smrstrauss has contributed countless hours, days, weeks, months, and thousands of comments to defend Barack Obama against everyone who questions the President’s eligibility. Smrstrauss sometimes writes long essay comments, and he often cites case law, so if you didn’t know better, you would be excused for thinking he’s an attorney. I can assure you he is not!

I also need to take this opportunity to backtrack on a supposition I previously made about the identity of this man. Based on the comments of another blogger who claimed to have researched the name smrstrauss, he concluded the person was D.C. Shadow Senator, Paul Strauss, who also happens to be a Democrat Superdelegate. After the in-depth research I have just done on smrstrauss, I now know he is not that person, and retract my comments suggesting otherwise.

Such intense activity by smrstrauss would make sense if Obama is paying him to confuse people about his eligibility to serve as President, but I have no way to confirm this without filing a Freedom of Information request of the administration.

If smrstrauss is not being paid by someone, then his efforts must be a labor of love, and for that President Obama may eventually consider bestowing the Presidential Citizens Medal upon this gentleman for his obsessive/compulsive determination to defend The One, irrespective of the truth.

Saturday, February 6, 2010

This is comprehensive legislation designed to address our nation's vulnerabilities to cyber crime, global cyber espionage, and cyber attacks. It would establish a new Cybersecurity Advisory Panel within the White House and stream-line the cybersecurity effort through all levels of government. The bill also calls on the Department of Commerce to establish and maintain aclearinghouseon information related to cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information to public and private infrastructure deemed "critical" by the President. The Secretary of Commerce would be given access to this information "without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access." The bill would also give the President newauthorityto "declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network."

The recent Supreme Court ruling that lifted a ban on unlimited corporate spending in federal elections has not deterred Democrats for this bill. Co-authored by Senator John McCain (RINO) it was known as the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act that included prevention form citizens to exercise their First Amendment in a 30- to 60-day period, except for designated media entities.

On February 2nd 2010, Rep. Donna Edwards, Maryland and Rep. John Conyers, Michigan, introduced a constitutional amendment, H.J. Res. 74 that present drastic measures concerning the regulation of expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech; despite the long record of unions and corporations donating to the Democratic Party of the United States.

Friday, February 5, 2010

The really good news is that so long as Washington, D.C. is buried under a record blanket of snow, Congress and the President will have difficulty implementing legislation that will harm us. Bring on the glaciers!

A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. Thomas Jefferson

Tomorrow, February 6th, is Ronald WilsonReagan’s birth day anniversary, but that isn’t as important as to what legacy he left behind – guided wisdom for America, that he loved so much, as much as the American people, that Americans should follow in order to reform our nation and its government back to the path of productivity, national pride, unity and the Jeffersonian republic. This reformation applies to all – citizens, elected officials and the way we think about values. It applies to Republicans just as much as Democrats who have drifted away from what made this country great.

Thursday, February 4, 2010

Is it fair to say that journalists deserve the lion’s share of responsibility for the way politicians are perceived by the public? Of course it is, because they control the microphones and cameras, and they use those handy tools to portray liberals as open-minded, caring altruists, and conservatives as heartless, closed-minded religious zealots. They nearly always mention party affiliation when reporting about a conservative who has fallen from grace, but they rarely mention the party affiliation of a liberal who has behaved similarly.

Is it fair to say that we elected Barack Obama because the media was in the cheering section of the bleachers throughout the presidential campaign, and has remained there ever since he won the election? Absolutely! During the election, with the power of lights, cameras, television, the internet, and print media, the media managed to convince a majority of the voting public that their man was “The One” we have been waiting for. The media believed in Obama, so they put him on a pedestal. Describing such star-struck reporters and talking heads as journalists insults the memory of that quaint old idea of “fair-and-balanced reporting”. So, this begs an important question.

Why do we always turn to the major networks to run the debates, and allow the journalist/moderator to choose a laundry list of cherry-picked questions to ask the candidates, especially presidential debates? Is it simply because they own the cameras, therefore we assume we must turn control over to them, or might it be because journalists have subtley convinced us that they are smarter than everyone else simply because their faces are on television every night. Alternatively, have we as individuals just become lazy voyeurs who accept the traditional format because the American public is unfamiliar with other formats? The answer is probably all three. This needs to change. Now!

Even though the mainstream media has deliberately under-reported the spontaneous growth of protest against this administration, at the grassroots level it is a widely-known fact that tea party revolutionaries of all political stripes will be on red alert during future political campaigns. Thus now is the time for us to think about our expectations for future debates. We need to change to a format that gives opposing candidates more time to express their views, and to directly challenge their opponent’s remarks, with little or no intervention by the moderator. Putting it bluntly, we need to geld the moderator in order to give the debaters their voices back.

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

A new website has just been established inviting whistleblowers to report specific illegal, unethical, seedy, or duplicitous activities by our supposed "leaders". Visit Paul Revere's Deputies for further details. If you or someone you know has a secret to leak about corrupt government officials, this will be the place for anonymously reporting that information. Spread the word!

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Mentioned frequently at Lighthouse Patriot Journal, ARM, here and other places is the descriptive two words of the government created in early American history – the JeffersonianRepublic. It was created by learned men, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, John Jay and other colonial-early Americans who had the advantage of being educated in classic education where the wisdom of the ancient civilizations, particularly the Greek and Roman, were taught along with contemporary wisdom of philosophers and political scientists and other studies. While the Greeks had invented democracy, it was the Romans who invented the republican form of government. Indeed, the Roman Empire had often been referred to as the Roman Republic.

As Thomas Wolke wrote at Jeffersonian Republic Now, January 10th 2010 …

Some people have tried to draw a parallel between the decline and fall of the Roman Empire and the current condition of the United States. To me, however, the period of Rome’s late Republic, seems eerily similar to what is happening to America. How?As the RomanRepublic grew (conquering Italy just as we conquered much of North America), the prosperity of the country grew apace. … The patricians found it financially beneficial to obtain slaves from the conquered peoples to run their estates and man their factories. The result was to throw millions of free Romans out of work or into poverty either because they were replaced by slaves or because wages dropped so much due to competition for remaining jobs that families could not subsist on them. … This is an overly simplified version of what happened to Rome’s republic. But if any of this resembles the current model of how the United States is operating or where we’re heading, then there’s cause for alarm. The question is, will we Americans maintain our Constitutional Republic (which was modeled in large part on the Roman Republic’s constitution of checks and balances and a bicameral legislature), or will we disintegrate economically and constitutionally until we, too, are swept into the dust bins of history?

Obama is either stupid or evil. Either way, his policy ideas are kindling designed to destroy America.

Imagine for a moment that Obama has absolute control of your family checkbook and bank account. How quickly do you think he would bankrupt you, and put all of you in debt into perpetuity? Based on all he has said and done up to now, I believe Obama would happily bankrupt Americans in a nanosecond.

When your family budget is in the red, do you say, "let's add debt to our charge cards to spend our way out of this mess?" No! You cut your spending! I say again, Obama is either stupid or evil. You decide.

Why did we elect this man to hold the most powerful office in the world? The American economy cannot sustain this kind of idiocy.

For those of you who say Obama's dual citizenship with the U.K. doesn't matter with repect to his eligibilty to be President, I say "think again." It matters now more than ever, and there is a way to constitutionally remove Obama before 2012, but it won't be easy. How badly do you want this to happen?

The Honolulu Advertiser published photostats of the original long-form birth certificates of twin daughters born to Eleanor Nordyke at Kapi'olani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital Aug. 5, 1961, one day after Obama was supposedly born at the same facility.

The Nordykes' certificates include information missing from the short-form document for Obama published online, including the name of the hospital, the name of the attending physician, name and address of the parents, the race of the parents and the race of the baby.
You decide where the truth rests.

[UPDATE: After posting this image I discovered that Google offers a tool called Google Translate, so I used it to see if the characters match those we see on the sign. I suggest you give it a try as well. I know nothing about Arabic, but the translated results looked different, although the characters were so tiny I could barely distinguish them. Considering the public's demand for the truth, it wouldn't surprise me if this sign is somewhere in the U.S. If so, someone went to a lot of trouble, which at the very least indicates that this issue will not go away until we get some transparency from our opaque President.]

Are you listening to the People? Are you listening to the members of your "912 Project" who are trying to talk to you on air about the "elephant in the room" of American political discussion and legal question about the 2008 election. Or are you still telling your call screeners to block their calls and/or moderate them out of your chat rooms just like the members of Congress do? Congress is not listening to the People. The election in Massachusetts showed you the results of what happens when the elected officials do not listen to the People. Are you not listening to the People anymore either or just selectively listening? The questions are not the questions of a fringe percentage of the people. See this recent survey: http://www.westernjournalism.com/?p=5697

A very large percentage, probably 75%+, of the "912 Project" folks and "Tea Party" folks believe that Obama is NOT constitutionally eligible to be the President or certainly at least want the matter fully and thoroughly discussed in public and investigated by the courts and Obama's hidden and sealed early life original paper records unsealed and revealed. Photoshop'd digital images on the internet are legal proof of nothing. And then there is the issue for the 1961 newspaper ads you tout as infallible proof. They were not placed directly by family members but instead generated by the Hawaiian Health Department upon any birth registration in their system no matter what the source. Have you heard of the GIGO effect for birth registration systems. Falsified birth registration records in yields false record reports in Hawaiian newspapers out. This was likely done by the grandmother to get her newborn grandson U.S. citizenship, despite of where he might have really been born. Births could be registered with a mail-in form filled out by one family member for "at home" births. No one back then in Hawaii checked the credibility of the facts placed on that form. No one at the time was thinking 45 years into the future that this child might someday be a candidate for President and thus someone would question and check the underlying credibility of the facts on the mail-in form. Citizenship is the goal of any falsified birth registration in the U.S. Simple as that. Listen to this discussion on the Bill Cunningham radio show.

Glenn, are you giving these people who have supported you a voice? Or are you silencing their voices from getting on the air? If you don't believe me, take a survey of them. Ask them on the air simply, "Do you believe that Obama is a "natural born Citizen" of the USA to constitutional standards?" And then put the responders and callers on the air to answer you and discuss it with you. But listen to them also and don't just immediately shout them down and ridicule them at first breath.

Not only does Obama have questionable eligibility because of where Obama may or may not have been born, but in addition to that and most glaringly it is because Obama's father was NOT a Citizen of the USA, or ever an immigrant to the USA. We are a nation of immigrants and Obama's father was not one of them. Obama was not the son of an immigrant as was falsely stated during his inauguration. The American people were lied to by Obama through the whole campaign enabled by a complicit media. Obama's father was not even a permanent resident of the USA. Obama was born with multiple citizenship and more specifically, he had allegiance to Great Britain at birth via his British Subject father. Obama was thus born a British Subject too under the British Nationality Act of 1948. Obama does not dispute this but won't allow a full public discussion or debate on the impact of this in Congress or in the courts. How can a British Subject be considered a "natural born Citizen" of the USA to "constitutional standards". The Democratically controlled Congress investigated McCain's citizenship status when asked by doubters of McCain but not Obama's when asked by doubters of Obama's. Have you ever thoroughly investigated why?http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/01/i-believe-fix-was-in-for-2008-election.html

Progressives have deceived many Americans with rewriting history and the meaning of words. But have they fooled you too on the meaning of the unique legal term of art "natural born Citizen" in Article II of our Constitution? Or do you have your mind totally closed to the real truth for some reason known only to you? Or have threats been made against you and your family and/or your career if you tell the real truth of the meaning and intent of Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of our Constitution as it applies to Obama.

Obama may or not be a Citizen or a 14th Amendment "born Citizen" of the USA depending on where he really was born. But he is certainly NOT an Article II "natural born Citizen" (to constitutional standards) as is required by Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution to serve as the President and Commander in Chief of the military. See these URLs and the attached graphic for a visual presentation of the difference between a Citizen and a "natural born Citizen":http://www.scribd.com/doc/23904005/http://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/

So Glenn, you believe that Obama is a Citizen. You said so on the air when you call doubters crazy and used Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals #5 "ridicule tactics" on your own listeners. Are you being deliberating deceptive?

The real question is, do you believe Obama is a "natural born Citizen" as the framers of the Constitution understood that legal term of art to mean in 1789 and which has been affirmed since by at least four U.S. Supreme Court decisions which have never been overturned or reversed by any subsequent Supreme Court decision. The progressives have covered up these cases up or obfuscated their meaning in discussing "natural born Citizen" on the internet. That is function of Obama's "blog squads", to deceive people. The have filled Wiki and other sites with false and misleading information in an attempt to rewrite history on the internet. But the truth is there in the cases for every intellectually honest person to read and understand. You can find those four cases and other relevant cases discussed in this excellent legal essay on "natural born Citizenship" by Mario Apuzzo, Esq.http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-citizen-clause-requires.html

I suggest you do some more research on the founders and framers intent for the "eligibility clause" to be President and Commander in Chief of our military in Article II, to constitutional standards. Research who put that unique legal term of art into Section 1, Clause 5 of Article II and why! Obama had to repeat the Oath of Office a second time because it was not to "constitutional standards" the first time. Constitutional standards are far more important than popular opinion standards, especially when it comes to who can be President and command our military and who will reliably provide for the protection of our liberties and the national security of our nation.

Read the above link and the cited Supreme Court cases. Dissect the Apuzzo essay and cases he cites. Analyze them. Then present what you learn by doing an explanation of each case on your radio and TV shows if you have the courage to do so. Or have you been scared off doing it with threats to you and your family? Or does your fear of damage to your career trump your love of the U.S. Constitution and protection of the future of our Constitutional Republic for your kids and grandkids to come? Are you in denial on this constitutional issue? Are you doing all that you can to expose the full truth about Obama and his early life and hidden and sealed records? Only you looking into the mirror each morning know the answer to that question. There are no heroes. Only ordinary people living in heroic times. How will you be remembered in this historic time and calling to preserve our liberty? Many have been called before and many in standing up to protect our liberty have perished or lost everything, except liberty. Where are you standing regarding the "elephant in the room" question of the first half of this century and the progressives' hail-Mary pass to their Socialist/Marxist America goal line with getting Obama elected even though he is not constitutionally eligible? Will you let it stand? Will you work to tell the real truth and discuss openly Obama's birth Citizenship status and questions on the air or will you allow the progressives to silence you as well, as the rest of us have been silenced who do not have the microphone you do?

We ask of you a full, thorough, and fair public "on air" investigation, discussion, and debate with your listeners on the question of Obama's birth citizenship status to "constitutional standards" as it applies to Article II of our Constitution.

I challenge you to debate Attorney Mario Apuzzo, a constitutional expert on Article II, on this subject on the air.

If you choose to avoid that challenge, then little old me would be happy to meet with you in private or public to discuss this more fully. You can contact me via my website link which is below my signature.